Meteor PCN under unusual circumstances

RENEGADE_2

notts_phil wrote: »

Why would you pay people trying to scam you?

You wouldn't. I was never going to suggest for half a minute to pay just because this may be a Byelaw 14 implementation. The OP has a technical issue which I believe would wash in court. However, I need to establish whether it has to even go that far.

Stigy

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Question for Stigy.
Is a ppc able to sue under Byelaw 14 (being a contracted agent) or would they have to pass it back to BTP?

They could be able to report using Byelaw 14, in the way any rail staff member could, if the offender is present. The PPC could also use BL14 on the tickets if they wanted to. The railway company can use whoever they like to enforce their byelaws (Merseyrail use security guards in this way I believe). It all comes down to who is going to train the contractors to become competent, and who pays for it! I don't see why a parking charge should be any different to those being issued by councils in that the Byelaws make the owner liable for a penalty if their car is illegally parked. It would be easy enough to do, but to be honest, if a TOC is to go down this route, they might as well do away with the PPC and make their own PCNs.

peter_the_piper

Thanks for the reply and info.
This means that (AIUI) that a ppc can't try all the usual bluster/debt collector stuff and then when it fails they can't then slide it over to the TOC/BTP. is that right? No case in point just wanting to try and be clear on this.

Stigy

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Thanks for the reply and info.
This means that (AIUI) that a ppc can't try all the usual bluster/debt collector stuff and then when it fails they can't then slide it over to the TOC/BTP. is that right? No case in point just wanting to try and be clear on this.

I would imagine they could pass it on to a debt collector in much the same way as IRCAS would do with unpaid Penalty Fares, but when it goes to court, no debt collector costs are taken in to account, and niether will the PCN amount be taken in to account (in much the same way as prosecuted Penalty Fares). It would more than likely be the TOC that would be prosecuting it anyway, as the PPC wouldn't have the resources. Also, to clarify, if went to court it wouldn't be the PCN amount that they're prosecuting under, but the initial avoided parking ticket price if applicable (as far as their costs are concerned).

jlsmith_2

I have a thread entitled Meteor / Southeastern Rail where I outline in later posts why I think that Meteor tickets are (a) clearly issued under the PPC route and (b) cannot be enforced under Railway Byelaw 14. In summary, the section of the byelaw relating to payment requires that any penalty payable under the byelaw be displayed at the car park. Meteor do not do this and therefore no penalty can be levied.

In my own research I have never once come across a prosecution for parking offences under Byelaw 14. Never ever.